How to spot fake news. Fake News vs. Real Politics Fake Media
World Economic Forum, Switzerland
© World Economic Forum Fake news vs real politics
Zeinab Badawi: Welcome to the World Economic Forum in Davos. We are discussing lies. Today, this buzzword is on everyone's lips, because in the current Internet era, the phenomenon it refers to has become of particular importance. Let me introduce you to the participants in our discussion.
So, Jimmy Wales, co-founder of Wikipedia. The main goal of his latest WikiTribune project is to fight fake news. Joseph Kahn, editor-in-chief of The New York Times, whose circulation has skyrocketed since its founding in 1851 and has won more than 120 Pulitzer Prizes for its journalism. Anna Belkina is deputy editor-in-chief of RT, the Kremlin-backed television network officially known as Russia Today. Bilawal Zardari, chairman of the Pakistan People's Party, son of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, who was assassinated ten years ago.
Let's welcome our experts. And, of course, those who listen to us and watch us all over the world: on TV, radio and online.
I asked my colleagues at Click, a program that airs on the (BBC) that talks about the latest technology, for an overview of what fake news is and how it gets more and more sophisticated every time.
video clip
Fake news. Everyone uses this term today. And it is no coincidence. While President Trump may have contributed to the term's entry into the dictionary, the rest of the world is struggling to separate fact from fiction.
Headline: "Liberal Church Ministers Hosting Muslim Refugees Horrified by What They Found on the Pews." This news is fake. Jutta Kramm, Editor-in-Chief of the fact-checking organization CORRECT!V: "The headline was: This is what an Islamic society looks like, and we're getting there."
And this is a fake (on the screen - a post in social networks, Germany). “These were implausible, chilling videos…” (India). Also fake.
The problem is that today everything seems to fall under this concept, starting with real lies and ending with what you disagree with. So how do you separate fact from fiction, opinion from satire, and from highly deceptive and misleading headlines? Giants such as Facebook, Twitter or Google have been struggling with this problem for a year now. But do they have what it takes to fight in a world dominated by likes, clicks, and attention grabbers? Maybe one of the reasons why it is so difficult to stop this flow of false information is that there is a lot of money behind the creation of fake news.
Mile Grncarov (former fake news creator): “I have been doing this for several years. Then I was still very young. A lot of fake news is written by ordinary people. They sit at their computers with a simple formula: a scandalous headline plus false information equals profit. Once upon a time, even thirteen-year-olds could do this.
One thing is certain: fake news is much easier to fabricate and spread than it is to detect and expose. I admit that in the near future the problem may worsen. It is possible that new technologies will soon make us doubt not only the authenticity of what we read, but also everything that we see and hear. Our faces can be stolen, our voices can be imitated. Never before has reality seemed so illusory. Technology-assisted fact-checking organizations are working to identify and list fake news, researchers and politicians are beginning to study their impact, and we are all beginning to realize the extent of their power.
Theresa May: "By recruiting state-controlled media, Russia seeks to use information as a tool to spread fake stories and photoshopped images in an attempt to divide the West and undermine our institutions."
Is it too late, or is this just the beginning of a high-tech fake news arms race?
— Quick question for all of you. How useful is the term "fake news"? Joseph Kahn?
Joseph Kahn: This term is useful in the sense your video points to. The phenomenon of false information deliberately created for the wrong political or economic purposes is a real and very serious threat, especially when information is so widely used on a variety of technological platforms. I would say that today we are more aware of the need to fight the existing false news.
— We will return to this topic. Bilawal, do you think fake news is a good label for an all-encompassing formula?
Bilawal Zardari: Not sure. Because I understand, and it is obvious, that false information, propaganda, disinformation have long been components of the information war. Fake news has gained notoriety relatively recently, in the context of the American elections, as we saw in this video. When politicians use the term as an all-encompassing phrase to cover up political manipulation and what they don't like, then its meaning becomes even more vague. This is the main point of our discussion about the usefulness of this term.
— Anna Belkin?
Anna Belkina: In my opinion, this term is extremely dangerous, because it brings confusion to the discussion and public discourse about the accuracy and factual reliability of information. In addition, as you and I can see, fake news becomes a weapon in the hands of public figures as well as media organizations, a way to silence dissenters, a way to avoid responding to any kind of criticism, and in the most ultimate sense, it exacerbates the real problem that we're trying to decide here.
— Good. Jimmy Wales, so we call fake news and fabricated information, and just news that people don't like?
Jimmy Wales: Yes, I do think this is a problem. This is a surprise for me, but here I agree with Anna. True, to this it must be added that we should separate the fake news made up by teenagers and the like, and the actual propaganda in the spirit of RT. Mixing these two concepts is actually a big mistake.
— Joe Kahn of , you personally received the fake news award that your paper deserves from the White House's point of view. And you know: all this is treated as a joke, for people this is another reason to laugh. Is this really a joke?
Joseph Kahn: President Trump's definition of fake news presents a real problem: his allegations of spreading fake news are themselves fake. The problem with fake news is not journalism, which sometimes makes mistakes in the process of creating a report and writing it, and then properly corrects them. Good journalistic organizations are always ready to admit their mistakes. All the awards that the president has given to "fake media" ended up in the hands of media organizations that made factual errors and corrected them. For me, this is an indicator of good journalistic practice. To call it fake news is to deliberately denigrate journalism, that is, to use the term, as the video said, as a tool to try…
“Now you wear some sort of badge of honour?” Like, I have a White House Fake News Award.
Joseph Kahn: Why not? I don't mind getting another one.
“Bilawal, this is just one side of the fake news. In fact, in your part of the world, where fake news is circulating on WhatsApp or some other media, it can have more dangerous consequences.
Bilawal Zardari: I think they can have dangerous consequences anywhere. I think what is most disturbing and dangerous is what has been said here in connection with President Trump. Not because the award he founded is ridiculous in itself. The fact is that in this way the leader of a democratic country exposed the press in the most unattractive way. That is my opinion. Since the political parties in our country fought for democracy, and it has not yet fully matured, I am concerned about the use of this term by politicians: in this way they denigrate the press - and, on the other hand ...
Does the same thing happen in Pakistan? Who is behind the fake news?
Bilawal Zardari: I will not name these politicians, but the attacks and vilification of the media, the constant repetition of the words "fake", "fake" in droves - that's what happens.
Who else is behind this in Pakistan?
Bilawal Zardari: As in any other place, there is no exact answer to this question. Yes, politicians are behind it. The media in my country, as well as in other parts of the developing world, is much more profit-oriented, it reflects the interests of big business, which is not limited in the way it is in the UK, where you cannot own a television station or newspapers. They pursue their own commercial interests. Therefore, non-traditional platforms can serve as a source of quite reliable news.
— In general, many participants are involved in the game. Jimmy, Wikipedia is definitely part of the digital explosion. But you, how to put it more delicately, are also part of the fake news problem, because Wikipedia has quite a lot of inaccuracies.
Jimmy Wales: Of course, there are many inaccuracies in everything. But the important thing is that we at Wikipedia do our best to correct them. We have very high standards regarding the reliability of sources. We have a very open policy to fix any bugs that come our way. Of course, serious research, serious journalism means that mistakes can happen from time to time. But the key point here is that you just have to try to fix them. This is the main principle.
And no malice.
Jimmy Wales: This is really important. And, you know, a lot of the problems with fake news, when it's spread on social media and so forth, doesn't concern Wikipedia, because our community takes a lot of responsibility in evaluating sources. And so when we see fake news coming from teenagers in Macedonia, or something like that, our experts immediately determine: well, this is not a real newspaper, I have never heard of it. They will double-check everything and will never allow such information to Wikipedia ...
— Anna Belkina, in our short video we heard Theresa May accusing Russia of using information as a weapon. And, as you know, RT receives a lot of accusations from a variety of sources. I know you will say that this is not the case, but you know that NATO, French President Macron, Theresa May, the German government, the American government - everyone says that Russia, as a state actor, is involved in creating fake news and uses stations to do this. , like RT.
Anna Belkina: These accusations - and I will speak directly about RT, because many of them were directed specifically at us - these accusations are false, they are, without a doubt, false. I'm glad you mentioned President Macron's statements. In fact, during the presidential campaign, RT was targeted for spreading false information.
So you accuse President Macron of spreading false information about RT.
Anna Belkina: His campaign staff repeatedly claimed that RT was spreading false information about their candidate. However, throughout the campaign and after it ended, they failed to present a single, single example of this kind of news story.
— I know that you will call it falsification, but such statements come from many places, for example, from NATO. NATO claims that since 2014 there has been a significant increase in Russian propaganda and disinformation. Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg exposes Russian fake news agencies. In fact, I could list many more examples.
Anna Belkina: But this is part of the problem - that we are pushing different concepts. Terms such as propaganda, false information, disinformation are much more subjective and vague than fake news. And they are used by people to refute and discredit any contrary to their position, uncomfortable opinions or even just facts, any kind of messages. But when a presidential candidate or his team consistently and unsubstantiatedly makes allegations of falsifying the news and, you know, all the American and mainstream Western media are happy to point out any statement ...
- The evidence was provided by the secret services of Germany and France.
Anna Belkina: We criticize President Trump's statements in many ways, without trying to sort out President Macron's accusations. In fact, only one, one single media outlet called for questioning Macron's campaign, and that was the agency (Reuters). And they have not received a single example of false information provided by RT.
Jimmy Wales, are you happy with what you just heard? This intransigence and categorical denial?
Jimmy Wales: We have testimonies from all sorts of places. For example, the Columbia School of Journalism has a team of graduate students who are working on the RT Watch project. And they found many examples of completely misinterpreted events, false reports, bogus experts, outright lies. Just unbelieveble. This question should not even be considered open. And I also think it's very important to understand what serious people don't usually say: fake news is news that I don't agree with, it's not about suppressing those who express the opposite point of view. Because (The Wall Street Journal) and The New York Times don't call each other fake news every time they disagree on something. These are the basic standards of journalism.
Joseph Kahn: I think Anna is right in one respect, and Jimmy has mentioned this before. There is a semantic difference between propaganda or misrepresented news that is spread by the state or a news organization for some political purpose and is based on facts, but their main task is to give their interpretation of these facts in order to achieve ...
Here is President Macron. Some wild accusations were made against him that he had secret bank accounts, that he was a secret homosexual and stuff like that. There is no basis for truth here.
Joseph Kahn: There is a whole spectrum here, where on the one hand - propaganda and manipulation of information, and on the other - completely fake and harmful fake news.
- But this is exactly what they say when they blame RT.
Joseph Kahn: That is, you can discuss where they occupy in this spectrum.
Anna Belkina: None of these messages appeared on RT.
“Very well, I will read you exactly what he said. Emmanuel Macron said that RT - he also mentioned the Sputnik website - were “agents of influence who repeatedly spread false information about me and my company. They behave like agents of influence and false propaganda.” That's what he said. Deal with him then.
Anna Belkina: We tried, and repeatedly.
Bilawal Zardari: I will speak out in defense of Russia Today. Politicians, the media, biased media, a disruptive agenda, and so on. But let's not forget that weapons of mass destruction in Iraq are also fake news. Theresa May says in this video that Russia is using information as a weapon today, but she also says it in the state-sponsored media. We are sitting on the BBC platform, which is funded by the UK. We must learn to see it. After all, if you look from the outside, we also often do not notice our own shortcomings and weaknesses of the Western position.
“Brave of you, Bilawal. However, I must say that when we make a mistake, we admit that we did something wrong. Our arguments are now not equivalent. Yes, you will say that RT is the same national television company as the BBC. But the BBC is overseen by an independent regulator, Ofcom, which has nothing to do with the government. And the BBC regularly reports and investigates the government. Are you doing the same on RT?
Anna Belkina: We do exactly the same. Ofcom also checks us, all our programs. And just like Joe just described the process...
But the problem is that we are changing the rules of the game. Mistakes that RT made - of course we made mistakes in our reports and we went back to them, we corrected them, we published clarifications for the audience. But when it comes to RT or other alternative voices, legitimate alternative voices in the media, these kinds of accusations become a way to distort the meaning of what we are doing. Whereas other media, say the New York Times and the mainstream media, get away with it.
Related Articles
Russia is the target of NATO "fake news"
The Independent 23.09.2017The EU is Putin's main rival
El País 01.12.2017Russia threatens the international order
The Guardian 11/14/2017Fake news and biased news
Project Syndicate 07.11.2017Sweden and Denmark against the Russian threat
Aftonbladet 08/31/2017 - The BBC regularly defends its position on issues such as the war in Iraq and Brexit, which the government does not like. And the government regularly says, "We don't like what's on the BBC" and stuff like that. It happens all the time, endlessly. So there's no point in comparing.
Joseph Kahn: I would like to return to the issue of Iraq. Because I don't want us to walk away from here with the general idea that the participants in this discussion consider the reports of WMD in Iraq to be a good example of false news. From my point of view, this is by no means a good example of false news. This is an example of a completely bad policy or political goal that has been aggressively and ultimately inaccurately presented by the media. In other words, there was no fake news.
We have become victims of some kind of manipulation.
Joseph Kahn: The journalistic process of covering WMD in Iraq was not a process of maliciously spreading fabricated false news. Therefore, I believe that this case does not fall into this category.
- Let's get back to weapons of mass destruction, or weapons of mass disappearance, as they were called later.
Bilawal Zardari: My position is that no matter what they say on the BBC or the New York Times, I respect honesty and independence. But the thing is, they pushed through US intelligence reports that were pure fiction. So I don't know how you describe...
Joseph Kahn: Exactly: which later turned out to be pure fiction. At the time of their discussion, no one knew that it was fiction. If we knew it was a fabrication, we would not report it. The New York Times, the BBC, and other media outlets have double-checked their information on the matter, but no one knew it was a fabrication.
- It seemed to me that one of the spectators reacted irritably to the words that sounded here. By the way, you can somehow demonstrate your attitude to what is happening, for example, applaud if you like. Let's listen to the questions. We have Iman Usman in the room from Indonesia, the most populous Muslim country in the world. You are in the online learning industry. Your question please. Briefly, if possible.
Iman Usman: Many politicians abuse the media for their own short-term gain - winning elections. And this has led to rampant fake news, which, in turn, provoked a split within the communities. So, my question to the panelists is: what is the danger of fake news for democracy and who should answer this phenomenon?
We'll get back to the answer. Let's take the first question. How dangerous false news is for democracy. Interestingly, a poll was taken this month that showed that 73% of Americans believe that fake news poses a threat to democracy. Joe?
Joseph Kahn: I think yes. Perhaps I will approach this issue from a different angle. I believe that excessive partisanship in politics—not only in the US, but throughout the world—is creating the phenomenon of fake news, as opposed to fake news, which breeds excessive partisanship. We are in an environment where people lead a political life based on personality, where they make connections with certain uses of information based on its political value, on how it is used by political parties. I don't think that fake news is the cause of the troubled state of democracy. In my opinion, the spread of fake news is one of the most characteristic signs of a decline in common values and a common sense of truth. Iman Usman: And my question to the group is how much danger fake news poses to democracy, and who and how ... there is someone who should be responsible for this phenomenon ...
- We are moving to responsibility, let's take the first question first. How dangerous is fake news for democracy? In fact, a poll just this month shows that 73% of Americans believe fake news is indeed a threat to democracy. Joe…
Joseph Kahn: I think so, and I'll turn this question a little differently. I think hyper-partisanship in politics, not just in the US but in the rest of the world, is the source of the phenomenon of fake news, and she suggests that fake news in turn exacerbates this polarization. We now live in an environment where people base their political life on their own identity, where they accept certain news and information that is consistent with their political values and how their political parties use them. I don't think that fake news is precisely the cause of the problems with democracy, in my opinion, the increase in fake news is one of the most important symptoms of decline and dependence on some generally accepted values and generally accepted judgments about what is true.
— Anna Belkina, is there a threat to democracy, what do you think?
Anna Belkina: Yes, I agree with you, Joe, that any false information has the potential to be very dangerous, not only for the political process, but for any public discussion in general. However, several studies have been conducted in the US and Europe, and they show that although people may be vulnerable to fake news, false stories and information, they still make political decisions mostly based on evidence, truthful information that compelling for all of us. This does not mean that we can relax, but it can be a kind of beacon in this situation.
— Jimmy Wales, I want to point out that the Confidence Barometer study, covering 28 countries, shows that 65% of people get their news from the Internet, and this has a lot of potential to wreak havoc, because this is a lot of , truth?
Jimmy Wales: It's a lot, really. But one of the encouraging things that came out of this Trust Barometer is that people's trust in news coming from social media has dropped significantly, which means people are starting to realize that some of what they miss social networks may be true, but at times it is worth contacting the source for verification.
"That's the point, isn't it, that's it?" Do people really believe that this story about the pope supporting Donald Trump as a candidate, which was given to us by some Macedonian teenagers, is true? I mean, you know, smart people, they should think: Pope Francis supports migration and so on, that can't be true. Shouldn't we have more confidence in human intelligence?
- But they do not believe in it, although they shared ...
Joseph Kahn: It's not clear, you don't know it. But I [know] that in most cases, when people share something on social media, it means that they want their friends and the community to see and understand it.
- What do you think, if people share something on social networks, then they believe that the story is true?
Jimmy Wales: Yes, I think they think it's either disturbing enough, or convincing enough in the context of how they feel right now, that it can be told to someone that it deserves a read or some kind of warning at all. I think this is all very difficult for those who are addicted to reading the news: you need to keep in mind all the time that there may be news that immediately shows that they are simply ridiculous, like the one about the dad who supports Trump. But people who don't consume news as often and treat it more ingenuously... by the way, I think that in a free society people have the right not to be interested in news, but when they do get some information, it should be of high quality. They have a right to quality information.
— Anna Belkina?
Anna Belkina: I think we should first of all pay attention to why they have to read and share news there, and I think one of the important reasons is that most people in Europe and the United States for many years felt that their own media do not quite fulfill their task, as they saw that they did not reflect their reality particularly well. And so they began to turn to alternative voices, some of which are legitimate and responsible, like RT, while others are not. And until the mainstream media takes a critical look at why this medium came into being in the first place, until reporters and columnists make an honest effort to meet these needs, and not just squeeze legitimate alternative voices out of news discourse, this is a problem. will remain.
- Anna Belkina points out the weak point of the mainstream media, this is a really thorny question: why does the audience turn to other sources of information? Is it because the mainstream media are failing in their task of giving the public and readers what they need? So, it turns out that you also bear part of the responsibility ...
Joseph Kahn: I think our goal is to reach as many people as possible with our journalism, but I think we need to understand that a large proportion of the readership wants to receive information that is in line with their political beliefs and preferences, but the New York Times and the BBC are not obligated to supply them with information that confirms their beliefs, we are obligated to provide them with journalism. In a society where hyperpartisanship reigns, you encounter people who are constantly looking for sources of information that confirm the validity of their political beliefs. Often in the most reputable media, they fail to do this, and then they look elsewhere. But it is not our responsibility to supply them with fake or misleading news just to validate their political beliefs.
— Okay, but many say that the responsibility of the official media is also that they failed to form some kind of standards, which in its own way also contributed to the growth of fake news.
Joseph Kahn: I wouldn't agree with that.
“Maybe it doesn’t apply to The New York Times, but others…”
Joseph Kahn: I can't speak for all the mainstream media, as you can imagine, but I think the mainstream media are basically doing their best to try and improve their work. They make mistakes at times, the journalism process is inherently imperfect, but we have an obligation to deliver factual reporting and that is how we win our audience. You know that we have a very significant audience. But you can't, looking at the world of news and information in general, blame the failure of the mainstream media for the fact that opinions based on one's political preferences have now become so heavily circulated on the Internet.
- Good. Let's address the public, we have one more question. Rebecca McKinnon from the United States, who works on information technology and free speech and privacy criteria. Rebecca, your question is short, please.
Rebecca McKinnon: Of course... My question is related to the previous one, but it is about business models in a democracy. We now know from process studies that have taken place in recent years that the information companies that appear on social networks are the result of a very skillful use of the functions and services that social media like Facebook provide advertisers within the Internet market. And the question is whether our media ecosystem is over-reliant on advertising, especially with those ad technologies that track people across the web and allow targeted messages to be sent to very specific groups of people. To what extent does this threaten the existence of a democratic society?
- Yes, this is a big topic, let's limit ourselves to discussing whether we need to somehow rework our business model, which assumes that advertising hits the target as accurately as possible ...
Jimmy Wales: Yes, the advertising business model has been extremely disruptive to journalism, but one of the most encouraging signs I've seen in the last couple of years is the incredibly personalized, all-digital subscription to The New York Times and other quality publications: people are finally are beginning to understand that you still have to pay for high-quality journalism. The particular problem with these advertising technologies is that wherever I go on the Internet, I see the same advertisements everywhere, I see advertisements for boats, because I love boats. In the old days, you could say: I want to sell boats, I'm looking for men in their fifties in a midlife crisis, because those are the ones who usually buy boats, and you assume that they can read the New York Times, The Guardian and the Wall Street Journal, for example, so that's where you advertise. Now it's not like that, I can be on a Reddit site, on some forum, on some spam site, anywhere, and it will be the same everywhere. This means that serious players are now directly competing with each other in getting dollars directly for clicks, which becomes a source of the wrong motivation for everyone.
So we need to redesign our business model?
Jimmy Wales: We need to redesign our business model, absolutely right. Advertising as one of the elements of the business model is good, but in such an environment where advertising services are very automated, journalism simply cannot be a competitor, we are talking only about endless clicks.
— We will come back to the decision, to the idea of what can be done, we will get to that, but now… We need to redesign our business model, what do you think?
Bilawal Zardari: Without a doubt, I agree that not only fake news, but this business model is a fundamental threat to democracy and the media, especially in countries like Pakistan, although there are other examples. Big business corporations control most or even all of the media in Pakistan, they dominate everywhere, they control the presentation of information, and they do not hesitate to produce fictitious news, launch fictitious information in the Internet media, and the quality of journalism in Pakistan ... That is, let me say that Pakistan also has very good journalism, in my country we managed to prevent three military dictatorships thanks to some of the bravest journalists. But because of this commercialization, because of the big industry bringing money to Pakistan and the government giving away cash, what they're doing now on TV is more staging, PR and propaganda.
— Anna Belkina, do you think the current business model, which only seeks to succeed in a big advertising competition, leads to the pursuit of sensationalism and can it become a breeding ground for fake news?
Anna Belkina: I think this is part of the problem, but not the main one. From my point of view, false information is equally harmful when it is generated and spread purely for the sake of entertainment, and when it is done for the sake of political influence or in order to make money from it. And the problem, again. is how we can make the audience immune to this kind of information, regardless of why it was created and distributed. And I know we'll get to that later.
And I think that just brings us to the problem of whether to consider media like Twitter, Facebook, Google and so on as publishers or social platforms. If these are publications, the same as newspapers, or the same BBC, then they must comply with many rules. And they just don't want to be treated that way. Do you think they should be more accountable, and should, say, Facebook overhaul its entire business model and come up with a new algorithm that, for example, will handle more commercial content from brands and news providers. Jimmy Wales, you're nodding, so...
Jimmy Wales: Yes, I think it's very interesting what Facebook is doing, and we don't know exactly where it will lead yet. On the one hand, serious publishers should be glad that perhaps not only thanks to enticing headlines can gain support on social networks, but on the other hand, many are worried that this will lead to a decrease in traffic from Facebook, and in the short term these fears are not unfounded, I'm sure. But I do think that social platforms should pay attention to the role of the information that they provide to consumers, not only for reasons of concern for the public interest - although, of course, this should be considered - but also for the quality of the experience that users receive from them. . If you get the feeling that you come to Facebook or Twitter, all kinds of crazy stories fall on you there, and you can’t even figure out where it’s true and where it’s not, it’s possible that you don’t want to go there at all, stop using Facebook altogether and say: I want a simple service to look at photos of my friends' children. And then everyone will move to Instagram, why do they need Facebook. So the point is for them to take it seriously.
“And you think they haven’t done enough for that yet.
Jimmy Wales: I believe that they did not do enough to ensure that the reputation of their brands was not tarnished.
— But you classify them as platforms, and not as publishers who are required to follow certain rules? Do you still think that these are social platforms?
Context
Assad's chemical attack - fake?
Hlavne správy 27.04.2017"Impichara": an opera about a cure against Trump
Operatico Politico 16.08.2017Fake news and Kremlin double standards
EurasiaNet 05/18/2017The American empire is falling apart from within
CounterPunch 03/30/2017 Joe Kahn...
Joseph Kahn: Facebook is among those caught in this real quandary, and they strongly oppose being reclassified in the business ecosystem as a publisher, which would mean they are responsible for everything that their two billion users post around the world. . Ultimately, to ensure accuracy and truthfulness, they would need to hire everyone in the world to ensure that everything published on their platform meets their standards, as a good publisher usually does. And therefore, in the case of Facebook, it is literally impossible to change their business model to a publishing one. At the same time, they feel some of the same pressure as publishers, because they themselves feel a certain responsibility for the worst fake news that can influence political debate. I think this explains why Mark Zuckerberg announced this change in algorithms, to sort of step back from trying to be a major news provider or positioning himself that way. And while that doesn't mean news won't appear on the platform at all, it does want to be a social media that people don't use as their main source of information.
“But they may face a real decline in income as a result of rethinking their policies. They may just disappear.
Joseph Kahn: This is unlikely to happen, but in my opinion, their role as a source of news and information may become less significant, and, at least from what they tell us, they themselves will not resist the fact that they are no longer considered such an important source. news and information.
Bilawal Zardari: How will Facebook's decision affect publications like The New York Times? After all, when news is actively promoted on Facebook, this contributes to an increase in the number of views on the publication's website.
You are doing my job now!
Bilawal Zardari: I beg your pardon.
- It's OK. I give you permission.
Joseph Kahn: We are closely monitoring this situation, we are concerned, but we believe that we are not affected in the same way as the ecosystem of fake news providers who seek to increase the number of views through clickbait advertisers, and we have never done this. Facebook has never provided us with enough income to cover the costs of collecting information, reporting and publishing real news. Whatever the case, these are real pennies compared to publishing on our platform as a digital media company or with direct income from reader subscriptions. Facebook is a very small source of our income.
So it won't play a decisive role.
Joseph Kahn: There will be some impact, but we hope it will not be very significant.
— Anna Belkina, what do you think about changing this business model over time?
Anna Belkina: In my opinion, when discussing the role of all these platforms, we should not represent these three American companies, three platforms as global news censors. Of course, I can't imagine when the actual fake news will stop being the focus of attention, and I hope that it will, because it hurts all of us. But these platforms should not decide that one point of view has more value than another, that, for example, The Washington Post should be promoted more than The New York Times, BBC, TF1 or RT, when they publish credible reports.
- This is a very valuable argument. We have already said, as Joe Kahn said, that we simply may not have enough fact-checkers when we are dealing with a huge flow of news and trying to figure out what is fake and what is not.
Anna Belkina: This leads them into the temptation to become de facto censors...
This is a very dangerous delusion. Even if you find so many specialists, who will make the decisions?
When you imagine possible solutions, it must be quite difficult. For example, what YouTube has been good at is removing fake news, extremist videos, and the like after the first warning that they are not true. In my opinion, they are quite successful at this. What other ways could there be to solve this problem? You have the Wikitribune project.
Jimmy Wales: Yes, Wikitribune is my attempt to play my small part in thinking about this issue. My idea is this: we know that working in the user community has a huge positive result, we see this on the example of Wikipedia, of course, not everything is perfect there, but good people work there, striving to do everything as best as possible. I'm interested to see if it's possible to create a Wikipedia-style community, combine it with professional journalists who get paid for their work, and create something new in the news space.
- That is, you want to combine civil journalism with professional journalism, organize their cooperation?
Jimmy Wales: Yes, cooperation on an equal footing. You see, genuine citizen journalism has sometimes produced interesting projects, but it constantly runs into obstacles that are inevitable for a simple conscious person sitting at home and working in his spare time. You just can't drop everything and start investigating some story that will take three days and so on. At the same time, we know that thoughtful people can make a significant difference. In the past, the structure of most news sites has not produced anything useful for the reading community. A classic example: Here you have a news article, and under it the most terrible people in the world are colliding, cursing each other. This is precisely why many journalists are wary of the Internet community: their experience is that they published something, and then they began to attack them in the comments. It's not great at all. These angry people writing comments do not represent the whole of humanity, there are many good people in the world.
- So, you want to create a new site where there will be news that people write for people. How will the work of a citizen journalist be paid? Since professional journalists will receive a fee, it would be fair ...
Jimmy Wales: These are volunteers, they do it out of love for the topic, out of love for the news ...
Is it fair that some will be paid and others not?
Jimmy Wales: If someone considers this unfair, then he should not take part in this. If you are interested, you can do it.
- So, this is Wikitribune, soon you will be able to get acquainted with this project, it will soon appear in your Internet space.
Let's go back to our listeners and listen to the question of Zuneid Ahmed Palak, Minister of Information and Technology of the Republic of Bangladesh.
Zuneid Ahmed Palak: I thank the distinguished participants in this discussion for their in-depth analysis of the topic. In my opinion, there are two ways to deal with fake news. One of them is, of course, strict regulation, and the second is self-censorship. My question to the panelists would be: what would you advise to do in a state like Bangladesh, or would you prefer a mixed option?
- Do you mean that an attempt to tightly regulate the flow of information will deal a blow to freedom of speech?
Zuneid Ahmed Palak: Yes, because tough government guidelines to regulate fake news can actually harm freedom of speech and freedom of the press. So my question to the panelists is about the preferred way to deal with this phenomenon: which is better, self-censorship or heavy regulation? Or would you prefer something in between?
“Okay, thank you. As we know, in the UK, the Prime Minister has already ordered the creation of a new unit to combat fake news. We also know that France and Germany have introduced regulations, in particular, Germany has introduced very significant penalties for creating fake news. That is, we already have before our eyes an example of government orders regarding fake news. I would like to address this question to Bilawal Bhutto first: So, how do you find the right balance in trying to regulate hate speech and still preserve freedom of speech?
Bilawal Zardari: I am very interested in how this situation will develop further in Germany, a country that seeks to uphold fundamental democratic rights. It will be very interesting to see how things stand with the settlement of falsifications, as, indeed, in France. But with regard to the question of the Minister of State of Bangladesh, I am afraid of threats to freedom of speech, especially in young democracies like ours, where there is a tendency towards authoritarianism. That's why projects like Wikitribune really inspire me, because there are a lot of citizen journalists in Pakistan who can find an audience that trusts them, can write for real, and this will help them learn something. I like projects like Africa Check or the Ukrainian resource Stopfake, where journalists come together, like in Politifact, to check fake news. And, perhaps, this will form a whole community following a common goal.
So you want fake news to be checked from below, not from above, by the government?
Bilawal Zardari: I would say that it is more pleasant for me to imagine something like that.
And do you think that will be enough? Let's say, for example, there are elections in Pakistan this year.
Bilawal Zardari: Exactly. And I'm sure that... We've seen fake news before in the pre-election period, and in Bangladesh and Pakistan, it's been around for a long time. There is one component to this issue: personally, I cannot entrust my state with the task of regulating information.
“What if you face the truly detrimental and destructive impact of fake news in your country, for example if it causes someone to die?” Isn't the strict hand of the state required instead of the control of volunteers?
Bilawal Zardari: No, I think we're missing one key ingredient - education. In my opinion, we need to rethink how we teach children in school. I don’t remember being taught anything about journalism in high school, and I had to take such an elective at the university. If we taught kids about checking sources, about bias, about how to do research and test different points of view, if we told them what fake news looks like... I think education is a key component in this matter in countries like this, like ours.
— Anna Belkina, what can you say about fake news and the threat to freedom of speech and the role of the government in regulating falsifications?
Anna Belkina: The activities of many traditional information platforms - the press, television - are already quite tightly regulated by governments, this applies to both RT and the BBC, so I do not in any way believe that additional regulation will be the solution to this problem. Problems. As a member of the media community, I believe that the solution can be found within the community of journalists itself, in the area of mutual responsibility. But that becomes irrelevant when Donald Trump accuses someone of spreading fraud and the media takes it as a badge of honour, and President Macron does the same. And no one even checks this information. This can only exist outside of double standards, and not when editorial errors are used as an excuse to accuse entire organizations of falsification, and other people's mistakes are constantly justified. But when there is a fair attitude, analysis of information, when the mistakes that our team makes can be pointed out, when they can become the subject of constructive discussion, for example, with The New York Times and other publications, but RT can defend its positions, - This is the most constructive approach, in my opinion.
— Joe Kahn.
Joseph Kahn: Both the US under President Trump and the Russian government under Vladimir Putin have taken leadership roles in fighting what they call fraud, which I think reflects the riskiness of government intervention and oversight. The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has a seal, a big red seal, which it puts on messages it considers falsified. Donald Trump had an award for fake news. These are not the people the wider community should be targeting, not the ones who can tell us what is and is not true in the news industry. In my opinion, it is very easy to slip into authoritarianism from here.
“So you are against regulation by the government?”
Joseph Kahn: I would say that I hardly believe that a government settlement can be a way to fight fake news. The only thing that can be effective in the fight against fraud is to improve the quality of the news work, to pay more attention to quality news, to strive more for quality news on online platforms, and finally, simply to have more information at hand in order to counter malicious fraud. .
“That's the incentive for publications like The New York Times. Is that why your circulation has increased?
Joseph Kahn: People prefer brands they can trust, and this is confirmed on social media through authentic original reporting, and over time, we just need to be reminded of this.
— Jimmy Wales?
Jimmy Wales: Particularly in fragile democracies where there could be potential problems of government pressure on publishers, strict regulation is an extremely dangerous option. I also don't think that self-censorship can be a solution to this problem, I don't even really know what it is, I think it's an inherently wrong dichotomy. What we need, in my opinion, is a strong ecosystem, we need independent journalism that can tell the truth to the authorities, but at the same time is able to distinguish fake news and tell the truth about it.
“So, Minister, you have a number of good options, now, when you return to your work, you can put together a whole project with your citizens.
Now let's move on to the last question from our audience, Victor Ocean, a young activist from Uganda. Please, your question.
Victor Ocean: Thank you very much. I am from Africa, from the continent that has become perhaps the biggest victim of fraud. I wanted to ask the following question: on a continent like Africa, in its various countries, tribal ties are very strong in relation to politicians. Therefore, citizens do not question whether the news about their political leaders is true. I want to ask how, being inside such rhetoric, you can try to change this culture, how to deal with such norms?
Joe Kahn, I think you said a little earlier that people seek out opinions that reflect their own values, so speaking in the context of Africa and the question being asked, when people are tribal ties, how can you try ...
Joseph Kahn: It seems to me that tribal ties are not limited to Africa.
Yes, this is a more general context, but the question was how can one start to change such a culture?
Joseph Kahn: In my opinion, this is a common problem, and the situation is getting worse and worse: it consists in the incredible conditionality of political discussions by party affiliation. I think that even facts that are not due to political affiliation are subject to the party paradigm. You believe what you have to believe, as dictated to you by your political leader or a representative of your party. It's about climate change, economic developments, what's going on in your community, threats from immigrants... The notion of the need to use independent, factually verified information in democratic discussion has recently faded into the background. Tribal ties are beginning to play an increasingly important role. And, in my opinion, this is a huge dilemma of the mainstream media, which by their nature cannot belong to any parties, and, based on this, they cannot fully satisfy the demand of the audience by highlighting party relations.
- But this does not apply to all newspapers: for example, in the UK there is the Daily Telegraph (Daily Telegraph), which is called the Daily Torygraph, because it is associated with the conservative party of the country, the Guardian newspaper ...
Joseph Kahn: But imagine that Wikipedia, Wikitribune will develop in this direction, then this will lead to a significant deterioration ...
“Be that as it may, they don’t pedal fake news.
Jimmy Wales: What is important here, in my opinion: people like to buy, for example, a newspaper, it corresponds to their worldview and so on, and this is in the order of things ...
— This is a UK center-left newspaper.
Jimmy Wales: Or, for example, they buy the Daily Telegraph, and this is also normal. But Wikipedia is incredibly popular, as is the New York Times, people understand that, they also have a great desire to get clear factual information, unambiguous, as neutral and clear as possible.
Our discussion is coming to an end. That is, in fact, this is a hermetic environment and its impact on fake news. Anna Belkina, and then Bilawal Bhutto. Anna?
Anna Belkina: I think the solution to this problem should be a variety of points of view and a variety of stories reflected in honest, reliable reporting, this is what RT is striving for. Searching for news and issues beyond given boundaries, such as in the US, beyond partisan divisions, is a way to ensure that the public has access to the widest range of reliable news possible.
Bilawal Zardari: The issue of tribal ties and partisanship is very important, and party affiliation has begun to have a very toxic effect on the foundations of democracy at the international level. But I wonder that President Trump, in establishing these awards, rounds up and stigmatizes as partisan those publications that were previously considered objective news organizations. Hating you from party positions, he almost forces you to respond in the same manner.
- Do you think fake news, no matter how unsuccessful this definition, will continue to exist in the future? Anna Belkin?
Anna Belkina: Yes, but not for long. I think we all understand what they are fraught with.
Jimmy Wales: I believe that, as such, fake news, spam sites generated by teenagers will be sorted out using certain algorithms in Google, Facebook, and other resources. But there will remain deeper issues with social media and its funding, and we still have a lot of work to do with them.
Bilawal Zardari: We will face them for a long time, I only hope that we will learn to recognize them and teach our citizens this.
Joseph Kahn: As such, fake news is becoming less common, and fake news in the form of political slander is gaining in popularity. And this is the main threat at the moment.
“We have to end here. Thank you very much. So, you've heard a range of opinions about fake news, which I hope has given you some food for thought. A huge thank you to the panelists and a huge thank you to our audience, I think we have covered all aspects of this topic. Before we wrap up, I'll have a quick question to Joe Kahn: how do you think you'll get the White House Fake News Award this year as well?
Joseph Kahn: I would like to say that I look forward to it. If it looks the same as it did in the past, I wouldn't mind.
— Bilawal, do you think it is right to continue this story with premiums for fake news, or is it better to just eradicate them as a fact so as not to give an extra reason?
Bilawal Zardari: I think they will take on a life of their own and we'll just have to get used to them.
— Thanks to the participants of our discussion and our audience at the World Economic Forum from me, Zeinab Badawi, and the whole team of organizers of these discussions.
The materials of InoSMI contain only assessments of foreign media and do not reflect the position of the editors of InoSMI.
Donald Trump Calls Fake News That He Disagrees With
The scale of Facebook and Twitter is 2 billion and 330 million users respectively. The dozens of hours we spend on these social media platforms are evidence that many eyeballs are in one way or another contacted by fake news or misinformation campaigns.
Fake news sites received 159 million visits during the month of last year's US election campaign, according to a study by Stanford University, and by other studies, the most shared articles during the election were fake. Most of them are pro-Trump.
We find less evidence that fake news was released in the UK during the vote to leave the EU or the last election. However, there is clear evidence of cheating by bots in both cases.
There is a difference between reach and influence. The latter is very difficult to assess. It is still not clear whether the media manages views or simply reflects them.
One of the effects that can be assessed is how the amount of fake news reduces the credibility of the mainstream media. It can be argued that this increases skepticism in what people read online. However, people may simply begin to trust their prejudices.
People are losing trust in traditional media formats. Change in the level of trust in 2017 compared to 2012.
What do they do with it
After widespread criticism, companies had to start fighting fake news. Facebook, Twitter and Google announced measures to curb disinformation online.
Facebook, which has come under scrutiny, says it has brought in fact-checkers to flag controversial stories, slash ad revenue for fake news sites, and better moderate ads. Twitter claims to be better at dealing with bots, Google promised to improve YouTube's video ranking algorithms.
However, the criticism continues. Not enough seems to be done, and tech companies are reluctant to take action. They are afraid to appear prejudiced or be responsible for everything that users post in them. Facebook appears to be the most powerful media company in the world, but does not associate itself with the media.
However, the problem can be solved without their participation, thanks to political fears. Theresa May calls Putin's Russia "", destroying the foundations of the Western world. Politicians in the UK and the US launched an investigation into Russian interference in the elections.
How to identify a fake
Calculating fake news is not easy. Last year, a study by Stanford University found that students have a hard time distinguishing between different types of content online: paid, fake, or legitimate.
- Be skeptical of headlines. Fake news headlines are often attention grabbing and contain a lot of capital letters or exclamation points. If the title sounds ridiculous, it probably is.
- Look carefully at the address of the article. Many fake news mimic authentic news sites with a slight change in address. You can go to the real site to check the page addresses.
- Check the source. Make sure the story comes from a reputable source. If it hangs on an unfamiliar site, check its description in the "About Us" section.
- Pay attention to the unusual design. Many fake news contain typos and grammatical errors, as well as strange delivery.
- Check out the photos. Fake stories contain manipulative photos or videos. Sometimes they can be authentic but taken out of context. Do an image search to find the actual source of the photo.
- Check dates. Fake news timelines may not make any sense, or they may give incorrect or controversial dates.
- Check the evidence. Check the author's sources to confirm their reliability. The lack of evidence or the credibility of anonymous experts may indicate a forgery in the news.
- Find more reports. If no one else covered the news, then most likely it is fake.
- It's a joke? Sometimes fake news is difficult to distinguish from humorous articles. Check to see if the source can be parodic, and the tone and details of the articles are in jest.
- Some stories are deliberately false. Think critically about the content of the stories you read and only share what you are sure of.
News stories are often told in such detail that it's impossible to just come up with all the details. This is what makes them great news stories. But it makes sense to maintain a healthy skepticism about everything. Could this even happen?
By the way, you can follow the announcements of new articles in my telegram channel. Subscribe so you don't miss anything!
Denis Talalaev/Ridus.ru
While nationalists and oligarchs are operating in the country, liars with a rich imagination have dug in in the Ukrainian media on the salary of the Kyiv authorities.
The Ukrainian media continue to break all records for the amount of disinformation, fake news and outright nonsense.
Shot Okhlobystin
On May 1, a number of Ukrainian media, such as the List of Crimes resource, spread information that Ivan Okhlobystin was shot at his own mansion in the Moscow region. Okhlobystin himself refuted this stuffing - he is alive and well. At the same time, Okhlobystin's wife Oksana noted that the family does not have any mansion in which the Ukrainian media "killed" her husband.
LNR head Igor Plotnitsky arrested in Russia
Over the past few days, the Ukrainian press has been reprinting the "news" that the head of the Luhansk People's Republic, Igor Plotnitsky, has been arrested in Moscow. UkroSMI informed its readers that Plotnitsky is allegedly already being interrogated by the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation. Information about this "arrest" was spread by the speaker of the press center "ATO" Alexander Briginets. Briginets was generous with a variety of details. It turns out that Plotnitsky was already arrested in Russia and Briginets knows who will become the next head of the Luhansk Republic.
The press secretary of the head of the LPR said that Igor Plotnitsky did not appear on the screens for two days due to a common cold.
Operation "Insulin to the Occupied Territory"
The plot of the Ukrainian TV channel Hromadske about visiting the LPR and giving insulin to local residents turned out to be staged and filmed on the territory of Ukraine. This conclusion was made by media expert Anatoly Shariy.
Gloating RT correspondent
Shariy also debunked another fake from the pro-government media about how the RT journalist “told with a laugh about the militias burning the military of the Armed Forces of Ukraine from the Grads.
Background: Ukrainian blogger Denis Kazansky spoke on social networks about RT journalist Paul Slier, who allegedly “laughingly” commented on the process of shelling the positions of Ukrainian security forces by militias.
"News" was gladly picked up by almost all Ukrainian mass media.
As it turned out, the video really exists, but the journalist in the frame is extremely serious.
Deserted militias
The day before, the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine for the Donetsk region, Vyacheslav Abroskin, made another "stuffing" on his official page on the social network Facebook.
According to him, from the settlement of Gorlovka, which is now under the control of the Donetsk People's Republic, 40 militiamen allegedly deserted, as well as their commanders - the battalion commander with the call sign Sever and the company commander with the call sign Pooh, fearing reprisals. Abroskin stressed that these militias would allegedly be shot if they were returned to the Donetsk People's Republic.
In fact, the militia commander with the call sign Sever and other fighters who allegedly deserted are in Horlivka and remain in their positions.
Coat of arms of Ukraine on Google-maps
Espreso.TV invented the news “On Google maps, the Ukrainian-Russian border is now divided by the coat of arms of Ukraine.”
In order to dispel such an obvious stupidity of a resource that positions itself as informational, it is enough to go to link.
Striptease for veterans
The same Espreso.TV in the news "Striptease for veterans: Russian clubs came up with a show by May 9" passed off last year's event as planned this year. In addition, after a striptease in this nightclub in 2014, a prosecutor's check was carried out and a warning was issued, and on May 16, 2014, a federal law came into force that introduces administrative and criminal liability for public desecration of symbols of Russia's military glory.
Tanks "Armata" made of cardboard
According to the Ukrainian resource newsonline24.com.ua, “most of the construction of the “top-secret” Armata tanks is made of materials similar to cardboard.”
It's hard to imagine a more delusional fake. The prize for the news portal is the well-deserved title of “Means of Mass Hysteria”.
13.10.2014
So, let's collect in one post all the mistakes of our highly respected, honest and independent media.
It is clear that this post will focus on the Russian media. Only the Russian media bullshit us in such a way that you can't even believe that you can bullshit with such confidence. Ukrainian media, as you know, are also good. But they don't juggle the cards. They can embellish something in words, not say it, etc. But what they don't do is they don't photoshop the reports. This is the lot of RTR and Channel One.
Of course, finding all the fakes is an unrealistic task. But let's look at at least what we have now. We would like to start our review from our first exposure, which you could already meet on the pages of NoNews. So, the Ukrainian fascists are going to beat Dambaz.
But the Kremlinbots throw in pictures from Israel under fire by Hamas and pass it off as Lugansk. Even the terrain shows that this is not Ukraine. This photo was also published by the BBC, but we couldn't fucking find the original. 
And then, it means that the Russian media discovered American BlackWater mercenaries in eastern Ukraine. The photo of these guys was taken in New Orleans. Let me remind you that since the publication of this material, the Russian Foreign Ministry considers New Orleans a part of Ukraine. 
Here some bot tells that the Ukrainian PUNISIONS (sounds like menacing, a) killed a girl in Slavyansk. Previously, a photo of this girl has already appeared on the Web. In fact, she died a year earlier in the Crimea. 
There is even this. It turns out that Poroshenko is an agent of the US State Department. Naturally, no one gives proof links to wikileaks. The fact that the President of Ukraine is an agent of America, the media should take their word for it. 
Well, the photo is not a fake. This will not be shown in the Russian media. We have Russian patriots here, they are for Mother Russia and against the Saloed-Banderites. And, well, even against the Nazis - as without it. 
And this is some scumbag published, I don't even know this. If last time fake pictures were taken from other years at least, then this time the picture is fresh. The first photo is like a murdered girl in Ukraine. The second photo shows a previously published picture of a girl killed in Syria. 
Here, the dead girl in Ussuriysk is given out by the Kremlin pads as the one killed from the actions of the ATO. 
And here we have US propaganda set against honest workers in the Russian media. They (USA) returned to 1995 and published this photo under the guise of a Chechen. The damned capitalists are doing everything in order to desecrate the purest conscience of the Russo\Donbass media. 
And here we have the statement of Ladimr Ladimrych. Almost didn't screw up. 
Let me not comment on this photo, take a break from sarcasm. 
Remember how everyone said in the summer that after the Crimea became Russian, everything there became in general, and there are a lot of tourists, and life is better. Photos with clogged beaches of past years were published. 
Those who showed even the slightest desire to check this information could quickly see that this was not so. In Crimea, online webcams used to work (and are working now), where you can always see what is happening in 10 cities of the peninsula. There are a lot of personnel, here is one, I think it is enough. 
I found a comparison photo somewhere. Feel free to explain it. Written the way it is. The inauguration was in Russian. 
Here, see the date. 
The man Vadim knows better than Wikipedia what the real Bandera looks like. 
In the quilted group (in Odnoklassniki) another fiction is being spread. This picture was taken on February 3, 2007 in the German city of Ludwigshafen during a fire in a residential building. The baby was thrown out of the window and caught by the local police. 
The NTV channel reported that in Rome, several hundred supporters of Russia went to a rally against the distortion of information about the situation in Ukraine by European media. However, these students are protesting against cuts in social programs. In Russia, probably, it is considered as one and the same. 
In one of its reports, Channel Russia 1 used a video from YouTube. The “cap” of the video is, of course, not put into the frame. 
Photo of a Ukrainian helicopter taken in Ivory Coast. How did the Ukrainian plane end up there - ask the editorial office of RIA. 
Slavyansk, we recall, has recently been considered Uganda. 
Punishers Kolomoisky punished the mothers of punishers who punish Russians in eastern Ukraine. Fucked up already. 
You did not think that this review would do without LifeNews, did you? 
You only look at the comments on this photo in contact. 
Oh, here's more about the Crimea. 
Well, this is, of course, enchanting bullshit. The video can be easily found on YouTube. 
Russian propaganda cannot exist without gays either. 
Another fantasy. 
And another fantasy. 
Mexico, if anything, is also part of Ukraine. 
Reports from Mr. Strelkov. 
You just need to compare dates. 
Save Darbmaz people! 
Found in contact. 
Russia is rich in talents. True, the aunt plays extremely convincingly. 
I also took a contact. 
Actress from the same theater. 
Contact again. 
According to the source of information, you can immediately see what will happen right now. 
The contact reveals again. 
Look like that's it. Something like this.
Specialists conducted a survey among women aged 25 to 55 who talked about their intimate preferences. In addition, a test was conducted that showed the level of mental abilities of the fair sex. As a result, it was noted that women who prefer oral sex to regular sex have a higher level of intelligence, the fake throwers reported.
The big news was not confirmed, and the male segment of the blogosphere, of course, was upset. Except for those savvy guys who don't share rebuttals of pseudoscientific facts with their halves.
19: Ukrainian press buried Putin
At the end of January in the top Ukrainian news. Independent journalists cited a photo of the police cordon of Red Square as "irrefutable" evidence of the death of the Russian president. In addition, an employee of one of the media stated that he had seen at least one ambulance, which was located not far from the walls of the Kremlin.
As is often the case with news from neighboring sharks of the pen, the savoring of the topic reached the point of absurdity:
In fact, the police cordoned off Red Square a couple of days before the crazy stuffing appeared in the Ukrainian media: then, at the skating rink, which is located directly opposite GUM, festivities "Tatiana's ice" dedicated to the Day of the Russian student were held. Students from almost all Moscow universities, State Duma deputies, sports stars and journalists gathered for the holiday.
18: Dzhigarkhanyan canceled the Russian language
Another example of the brain algorithm of a Ukrainian journalist: what should a Ukrainian journalist do if for a whole week not a single loud speaker has been throwing mud at the “aggressor country”? Be creative! This is what the editors of the Ukrainian portal "Dialogue" did, giving out the news under the heading "".
The cult Soviet and Russian actor and director Armen Dzhigarkhanyan really said this phrase, but there is a nuance. It was said in 1989 - in the monologue of the hero Dzhigarkhanyan, music teacher Kastoriev from the film "Prince Luck Adreevich":
There is no Russian language. There are very few Russian words in the Russian language. Soldier, revolution, radio, TV - these are not Russian words. Here is swearing, rudeness - this is a typical Russian phenomenon. "Tavo-faq" - that's it in Russian.
17: Schoolboy won a month of life with a porn star
Gamer Ruslan Shchedrin became the star of the national press, becoming the 100,000th customer in the virtual store for cybersportsmen. As a prize from the owners of the resource, the student received.
Later it turned out that the student and the porn star are connected by something more than the opportunity to spend a month together in a hotel room. They are both - to varying degrees - representatives of professions associated with cinematic art: 
Judging
According to Ruslan Shchedrin's page on Kinopoisk, the young actor has two dozen TV projects and feature films behind him! Shchedrin was seen in the series "Voronin" and "Chernobyl: Exclusion Zone", as well as on the big screen, in the films "Happiness is ...", "Closer than it seems" and many others. Apparently, the news about the “porn month” for a young gamer is the usual viral advertisement of the same online store.
16: Dustin Hoffman burst into tears after learning about Ukrainian roots
Ukrainian journalists, the main blacksmiths of media stuffing, again showed their talent in early spring, inventing a new "star" compatriot. This time it was the legendary Hollywood actor Dustin Hoffman. "", - claimed in a number of publications.
According to notes in the Ukrainian media, Hoffman was so moved by the shocking revelation that he even burst into tears when he learned about his real roots.
The "sensation" was quickly debunked by media expert Anatoly Shariy:
I found a video of the original American investigation into the roots of the 78-year-old Hoffman, which is referenced by the Ukrainian media. First, Ukraine is very often called Russia there. Dustin's grandfather moved to the US in the early 20th century. The most interesting thing is that the Ukrainian media are silent about the fact that the actor's ancestors fled from the Jewish pogroms perpetrated by the hero of Ukraine Symon Petlyura. And Dustin Hoffman burst into tears just because of this. There was no question of any Ukrainian roots, Hoffman considers himself a purebred Jew. And the last thing that should “please” the Hollywood star: a monument to Simon Petliura, the very same one, will be erected in Kyiv ...
15: Muscovites Witness Stalin's Return
This brilliant fake stood out noticeably against the backdrop of strained April Fools' jokes from the media. The blogosphere literally "blew up" the message that.
The press service of the Moscow metro assured journalists that the plaster was in place: “We contacted the station duty officer, and this information was not confirmed. We deny it was an April Fool's joke."
However, the “resurrected” Stalin, even after the refutation, walked around the Web for a long time:
14: Arseniy Yatsenyuk was shot near Kyiv
The journalists of the UA-REPORTER portal found the body of the former Prime Minister of Ukraine Arseniy Yatsenyuk: the politician was found dead in his dacha. : During the inspection of the crime scene, investigators found seven shell casings.
The icing on the cake of fake news was the report that for some reason employees of the Investigative Committee of Russia are investigating the “high-profile massacre” of Yatsenyuk. Of course, the stuffing was quickly denied.
13: Putin winked at Americans in Times Square
The hilarious spring fake was spread by both domestic and foreign media: pixelated, became a persistent meme in the media.
Russian hackers, unknown switchers, and even Trump and Hillary Clinton were blamed for allegedly using the image of the Russian President for their own campaign interests. As a result, it turned out that Putin did not wink at anyone in Times Square: a photo editor with straight arms simply inserted a portrait of the head of state into a Volvo advertisement.
12: Ukrainians killed Putin's daughter
Ukrainian journalists vied with each other about a terrible car accident near Rotterdam: according to their version, and her husband Jorrit Faassen.
As evidence of the incident, Ukrainian journalists referred to a photo published on a resource with a telling name - "IPUKR". Journalists-"ipukry", however, did not even bother to check how many letters "T" in the name of the Dutch city.
11: Vitali Klitschko canceled Moscow
When the publication of ordinary stuffing is not enough for a Ukrainian publication, desperate measures are taken: The Svoboda.FM website published a note that was picked up by literally all independent media outlets. The case is in a high-profile information occasion: the mayor of Kyiv.
While in Muscovy there was an incomprehensible “fuss” around the decision of the leadership of the USSR from the times of Khrushchev to transfer the Ukrainian SSR “to the load” of the Crimean region, the Kyiv city administration did it decisively and quickly in a sporting manner, the article said.
“Recognize as having lost its effect the Decree of the Grand Duke of Kyiv, the ruler of Kievan Rus, Yuri Vladimirovich Dolgoruky“ On the founding of the city of Moscow ”, issued in 1147, as such, which is a historical misunderstanding,” the order No. 367 of June 7, 2016 allegedly says .
The mayor-champion, of course, could well have signed such a document, but in this case we are dealing with a classic fake. Traces of the work of the graphic editor on the image of the order are visible to the naked eye. In addition, on the Web, a version of the document was found without the signature of the boxer-mayor:
10: Russian actors are fighting in Syria
At the end of the summer, the main fake thrower from Foggy Albion, the Sky News channel, also distinguished itself. TV workers presented the audience with a high-profile investigation about "Russian mercenaries" in Syria, in the main role of which is the militant Dmitry from the most secret Russian detachment "Wagner".
With shocking news for the army of fans of the Hollywood vampire, two portals came out at once - Now88News and Times of Education. Seven thousand Facebook users shared this news, completely ignoring the disclaimers published on the main pages of these sites: all the news is fake, and those who took it at face value are fools.
All the most prominent LGBT resources on the planet issued rebuttals: the LGBTQNation portal released a refuting material under the heading “Deception! Robert Pattinson hasn't admitted he's gay yet." The editors of the domestic Gay.ru were also indignant. It is worth noting that fake photos of the Twilight star have been circulating on social networks for a long time, despite the denials.
7: Militant dill captured Pyaterochka
In the Pyaterochka chain of grocery stores, “This” stickers appeared on bags of seasonings from the well-known Polish company Kamis.
Yesterday I went to the Pyaterochka store near my house and suddenly saw on the shelf where Kamis has all kinds of seasonings that such a strange label was pasted on dill and salad dressing. I was surprised, I wanted to ask questions, but there was no one to ask a question except for the employees who put the products on the shelf.
Representatives of the X5 Retail Group hinted to the journalist that it would be better to remove the base fake: using the recording from surveillance cameras, you can find out that the Echo employee took her pictures anywhere, but not on the shelves of Pyaterochka. On the same day, the post about "Polish dill" sunk into oblivion ...
6: Mizulina promised to punish the impotent
A curious legislative initiative from a member of the Federation Council Elena Mizulina was published by the Ura.ru publication with reference to the Vladivostok newspaper: the senator allegedly proposed.
According to the material, every married man under 45 must perform his marital duty at least once a week, otherwise he will face an impressive fine.
The family is the cell of society, and evasion of conjugal duty is evasion of duty to society. If a man systematically fails to fulfill his marital duty or does it in bad faith, he must pay a fine. This measure will serve to further strengthen the family, the authors of the note quote Mizulina.
The senator herself volunteered to debunk the stupid stuffing:
5: Sanction-Impoverished Muscovites Eat Rats
A clever trick in the art of acrobatic fakery was pulled by the Dutch tabloid De Volkskrant: journalists burst into a huge article about the difficulties of the Russian middle class during the period of Western economic sanctions. The authors of the article claim that .
For some reason, Dutch truth-tellers linked the news about the opening of a bistro with nutria burgers in Moscow to the Russian embargo on European products. “And these people will tell us something about “post-truth”, about “Russian propaganda in Europe” and about “anti-Western hysteria in the Russian media”,” commented the article on the Web.
4: "Urbanina" in Sevastopol
The authorities of Sevastopol dressed up the city before the New Year: RIA FederalPress drew attention to the glowing:
The Sevastopol journalist Vladislav Osipov came to the defense of the Hero City, pointing out the shortcomings in education to the authors of the fake:
In the photo, Germany, it is clear by the letter H on the left behind the pedestrian crossing sign (means a stop) and by the letter A, on the right behind the pedestrian crossing sign (means a pharmacy), Osipov wrote on Facebook.
3: Posner "fired" the editor-in-chief of Channel One
"The First Channel of Kazakhstan" with the star of the Kazakh blue screen Aimira Shaukentayeva. As it turned out later, the demonstrated fragment of the program has nothing to do with the show of the famous interviewer.
“This is an absolute fake from start to finish. Obviously, this fake reflects the level of reliability of information on the First Channel of Kazakhstan, on which I congratulate the President of Kazakhstan, Mr. Nursultan Nazarbayev," Pozner said. After the scandal, the editor-in-chief of the channel, Ruslan Smykov, had to resign.
2: Killer Selfie
After a series of terrorist attacks that took place in Berlin in early May, several domestic media immediately published news that spread around the entire blogosphere: German Chancellor Angela Merkel a year before the tragic events photographed with one of the alleged terrorists.
Despite the fact that the picture was quite popular in the press, the blogosphere did not recognize the photo of Anas Mondamani, a peaceful refugee who was sheltered by a Berlin family, as the hero, but dubbed it a "suicide bomber" and "perpetrator of the attacks in Brussels."
1: Zoya, Bilzho and the War of Information
Cartoonist and psychologist Andrei Bilzho “blew up” Runet with his article, published in early December on The Insider website in the “Opinions” section. Having studied the medical history of the Red Army soldier Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya, Bilzho stated that she suffered from schizophrenia, and her dying feat is explained by a catatonic stupor with mutism into which she fell.
The article in which Bilzho called the heroine Kosmodemyanskaya mentally ill caused a resonance in society: representatives of the Russian Military Historical Society asked the Prosecutor General's Office and the Chief Military Prosecutor's Office to check the article for violations of the law, and German Zakharyaev, vice-president of the Russian Jewish Congress for work with mountain Jews, demanded bring Bilzho to criminal liability.
Later, Bilzho stated that the feat of Kosmodemyanskaya “remains a feat, despite the fact that she was in Kashchenko,” and also made timid attempts to apologize:
I didn't mean to offend anyone. For me, the Great Patriotic War is as holy as for any inhabitant of our country. If I offended or hurt someone with my statements, then I sincerely ask you to forgive me, he wrote in
Loading...
